Cardinal backs limited condom use

[cappie]

Cardinal backs limited condom use

One of the Roman Catholic Church's most distinguished cardinals has publicly backed the use of condoms among married couples to prevent Aids transmission.

Cardinal Carlo Maria Martini said that in couples where one had HIV/Aids, which could pass to the partner, the use of condoms was "a lesser evil".

The Vatican says condoms should never be used, even to stop Aids spreading from one married partner to another.

The Church teaches that abstinence is the best way to tackle disease.

Growing issue

Cardinal Martini, who used to be Archbishop of Milan, made the comments in an interview with the Italian weekly magazine l'Espresso.

In it he says that the fight against Aids, which has caused more than three million deaths, mostly in sub-Saharan Africa, must be pursued by all available means.

The Vatican has made no official comment on the article, in which the cardinal also raises the possibility of single mothers adopting abandoned children.

But the BBC's David Willey in Rome says that such matters are an increasingly important subject of discussion in Church circles.

According to insistent reports, Cardinal Martini was a close runner-up in last year's papal election.

[qfnol31]

I think that an intrinsically evil act cannot ever fall under the jurisdiction of "lesser of two evils."

[aalpha1989]

i don't understand...how can a cardinal like that be a close runner up in a papal election? how can someone like that become a cardinal? maybe i am just being stupid...or maybe i just dont understand...im confused

[qfnol31]

It might be his location as Bishop.

Certain Sees throughout the world are associated with the College of Cardinals, such as Boston or St. Louis or New York. He is the Archbishop of Milan, which is a very important seat in the Church, too, so he is automatically thought of as a Cardinal when Consecrated.

That being said, during the 60s and 70s those people entrusted with helping the Pope select good Bishops were not looking for good Priests but rather good sociologists and the like. Since Cardinal Martini was Consecrated Bishop in 1979 and 1980 this could possibly have been the case.

Long story short, the Pope doesn't necessarily know the Bishops before hand. This is one of the behind-the-scenes changes that Pope Benedict has been working on--reforming the current Bishop situation.

[jasJis]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='956829' date='Apr 21 2006, 09:52 PM']
i don't understand...how can a cardinal like that be a close runner up in a papal election? how can someone like that become a cardinal? maybe i am just being stupid...or maybe i just dont understand...im confused
[/quote]I ask the same question. I struggle with this, but if you read humana vitae and check what peter kreeft explains, it becomes very clear. It's not a choice when you understand all the aspects of why artificial bc makes the conjugal act no longer 'Sacred'. The Church will never condone an evil as being okay, just as it doesn't okay lieing even to save a life.

In order to defeat Aids, only the long term approach will work. Sex is sacramental in it's elements. it's about sharing Grace. Allowing artificial BC makes sex more about physical need and disorders it to the extent that the sacramental nature is denied. It then allows pre-marital and extra-marital sex to be justified under the umbrella of physical or emotional need. Sexual fidelity that keeps it between 2 people that become 1 in a marriage would eliminate 99% of Aids in a generation.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='956829' date='Apr 21 2006, 11:52 PM']
i don't understand...how can a cardinal like that be a close runner up in a papal election? how can someone like that become a cardinal? maybe i am just being stupid...or maybe i just dont understand...im confused
[/quote]

The media lies. The media wants ignorant Catholics to accept error.

I have never heard of the guy, and the people who actually know the Church and are Catholic were not saying this guy was a "close runner up". We also have to remember that "the dragon's tail will sweep one third of the stars from the sky"... if a third included the college of Cardinals, he might have come close... but then again, God uses even the wicked for His will, God did pick Judas...

Something else, has the media ever been right about the next Pope? If I remember correctly most people thought it would have been Arnze (sp?), people dismissed Pope Bennedict because of his age...

The Church gets a Pope that it needs, God guides them...

God Bless,
ironmonk

[aalpha1989]

[quote name='jasJis' post='956840' date='Apr 21 2006, 11:05 PM']
I ask the same question. I struggle with this, but if you read humana vitae and check what peter kreeft explains, it becomes very clear. It's not a choice when you understand all the aspects of why artificial bc makes the conjugal act no longer 'Sacred'. The Church will never condone an evil as being okay, just as it doesn't okay lieing even to save a life.

In order to defeat Aids, only the long term approach will work. Sex is sacramental in it's elements. it's about sharing Grace. Allowing artificial BC makes sex more about physical need and disorders it to the extent that the sacramental nature is denied. It then allows pre-marital and extra-marital sex to be justified under the umbrella of physical or emotional need. Sexual fidelity that keeps it between 2 people that become 1 in a marriage would eliminate 99% of Aids in a generation.
[/quote]

I wasn't really questioning the teaching, rather the cardinal...I don't understand how priests can become cardinals when they have questionable teachings.

[jasJis]

Same point. I was explaining the plain understandibility of the Church's teaching. I guess I should have said more. How does a CARDINAL keep his job? Wouldn't a CARDINAL have to be really messed up to have that opinion that's so different from the Church's?

[ironmonk]

[quote name='aalpha1989' post='956854' date='Apr 22 2006, 12:21 AM']
I wasn't really questioning the teaching, rather the cardinal...I don't understand how priests can become cardinals when they have questionable teachings.
[/quote]

People fall, my guess would be that he was a good priest or at least appeared to be until after he became a cardinal.

[jasJis]

[quote name='ironmonk' post='956861' date='Apr 21 2006, 10:31 PM']
People fall, my guess would be that he was a good priest or at least appeared to be until after he became a cardinal.
[/quote]But is that really likely? And considering the graces that are recieved in ordination, wouldn't it be a really huge act of will to go against the Church as a priest?

[qfnol31]

[quote name='jasJis' post='956862' date='Apr 21 2006, 11:33 PM']
But is that really likely? And considering the graces that are recieved in ordination, wouldn't it be a really huge act of will to go against the Church as a priest?
[/quote]

One must be open to those graces to receive them.

Also, one can dispell them at any time...Mortal sin does it über fast.

[Defender_of_the_Faith]

I really hope that Pope Benedict XVI makes some better choices in Cardinals than Pope John Paul II (Requiem aeternam dona ei, Domine) did.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='jasJis' post='956862' date='Apr 22 2006, 12:33 AM']
But is that really likely? And considering the graces that are recieved in ordination, wouldn't it be a really huge act of will to go against the Church as a priest?
[/quote]

Bro,

One third of the stars.

We were warned of this in scripture also. We are told to expect it.

Satan is attacking the Church... and has been for many years. He attacks those in positions of the Church with greater motivation. He would physically attack St. Pio.

The gate to Heaven is narrow my friend and few will enter... the gate to hell is wide and many will enter.

[b]St. Matt 7:13 [/b]
"[color="#FF0000"]Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the road broad that leads to destruction, and those who enter through it are many. [/color]
[b]14 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]How narrow the gate and constricted the road that leads to life. And those who find it are few.[/color]
[b]15 [/b] "[color="#FF0000"]Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep's clothing, but underneath are ravenous wolves.[/color]



[b]St. Matt 13:24 [/b]
He proposed another parable to them. [color="#FF0000"] "The kingdom of heaven may be likened to a man who sowed good seed in his field.[/color]
[b]25 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]While everyone was asleep his enemy came and sowed weeds all through the wheat, and then went off. [/color]
[b]26 [/b][color="#FF0000"] When the crop grew and bore fruit, the weeds appeared as well. [/color]
[b]27 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]The slaves of the householder came to him and said, 'Master, did you not sow good seed in your field? Where have the weeds come from?'[/color]
[b]28 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]He answered, 'An enemy has done this.' His slaves said to him, 'Do you want us to go and pull them up?'[/color]
[b]29 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]He replied, 'No, if you pull up the weeds you might uproot the wheat along with them. [/color]
[b]30 [/b] [color="#FF0000"]Let them grow together until harvest; then at harvest time I will say to the harvesters, "First collect the weeds and tie them in bundles for burning; but gather the wheat into my barn."[/color]'"




The warnings by Christ and the Apostles are clear in the Scriptures and explains perfectly the clergy that rebel against the Church.

The harvest is soon, don't let the weeds choke you.


God Bless,
ironmonk

[kamiller42]

The misguided cardinal asks to choose the lesser of two evils, but they are still two EVILs. It would be better to choose door number 3, abstinence, and do no evil.

[OLAM Dad]

What the good cardinal 'thinks' is totally pointless. Matter of doctrine are non debatable and unless I'm mistaken this is a matter of doctrine and therefore not open for theological debate much less disention.

The cardinal's arguments are often used to justify many of society's actions, including abortion.

[qfnol31]

While I don't think there's any doctrine on this particular issue, per se, it is intrinsically evil and have been stated as such, so it must be rejected. (Sorry, I just know a few people who have a field day with morals and would argue that since it's not doctrine, which they would first assert, it's not something that we must follow...and of course that's innaccurate to say the least.

[jasJis]

It's developed doctrine. One has to dig a little deeper in the analysis. But what are the fundamental principles?
What confounds me is a CARDINAL who blatently says that it's okay to do a little evil for a better good. That's fundamentally WRONG.

Now if he theorized that a condom is not intrinsicly evil, then that would be another thing all together.

(And kam, I could point out fundamental evils that may happen in door #3, but yes, abstinence in and of itself is not evil.)

Edited April 22, 2006 by jasJis

[YMNolan]

weak

[MC IMaGiNaZUN]

this is the typical thing a progressive would say, who despairs in humanity from being incapable of cooperating with Grace, so you might as well conceed to their desires, give them what they want, so that they can feel good about themselves, because they well never be capable of virtue.

Giving someone a condom, so they wont feel guilty will not solve the AIDS crisis.

Telling someone that they are a human being with a wonderful gift of sexuality, that is ordered to a certain good, beyond your own selfish pleasure, letting them know that they are a wonderful creation of God, with a gift of sexuality, that is to be used responsibly.

BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, that you are a human being, and NOT A SLAVE TO YOUR SEXUAL INCLINATIONS. YOUR ARE A FREE CREATURE.

And if they still feel guilty, go see a psychiatrist.

SHALOM

[Cow of Shame]

[quote name='cappie' post='956811' date='Apr 21 2006, 11:39 PM']
Cardinal backs limited condom use
[/quote]

I thought all condoms were 'limited use'. You mean they have kinds you can use more than once?